Questions over Downing Street's defence

Sunday 18 July 2004 23:00 BST

John Scarlett did not tell Lord Hutton key Iraq intelligence had been withdrawn as"unsafe".

This lay behind the Government's claim that Saddam was continuing to produce chemical weapons, but MI6 checkers discredited it last July. Mr Scarlett gave evidence to Lord Hutton in August and September.

No10 defends him in three ways:

1. Downing St says: The intelligence was beyond Lord Hutton's remit. His brief was to investigate the death of David Kelly and the "45 minutes to launch" claim in the Government dossier.

What we know: Lord Hutton took hours of evidence about detailed intelligence in the dossier. He made public unseen JIC assessments. And wasn't it up to Lord Hutton to decide what was relevant, not John Scarlett?

2. Downing St says: The intelligence about continued chemical production was "just one part" of the dossier's overall picture.

What we know: The claim Saddam was still making banned weapons was central to Mr Blair's claim Iraq was a "serious and current" threat. It and the 45-minute claim were the only new pieces of concrete intelligence. It was so important Mr Blair was personally informed of it by MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove.

3. What Downing St says: Mr Scarlett decided not to make public the withdrawal of the intelligence because it was a "sensitive operational matter" and MI6 was still checking the sources.

What we know: Lord Butler's report shows that while MI6 is still checking other sources, the "chemical production" claim has been fully discredited.